United States v. James Dickerson, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 9347

James Dickerson was indicted with others for a conspiracy to distribute ≥28 grams of crack and for a separate substantive distribution charge; after a four-day trial he was convicted on both counts and sentenced to 168 months.
Prosecution’s key witness, Jayquis Brock (a lieutenant for leader Joseph Jackson), testified Brock sold large quantities of crack, kept some profit incentives, and that Dickerson was a frequent purchaser.
Wiretaps and phone records showed 129 contacts between Dickerson and Brock/Jackson over several months; 31 recorded calls were admitted at trial.
An undercover video captured Dickerson selling an eight‑ball and several $20 baggies to an officer—the basis for the substantive distribution conviction.
Dickerson admitted post‑arrest he bought eight‑balls, broke them down, and resold $20 baggies; Brock testified he viewed Dickerson as a customer, not a member, and did not know or care about Dickerson’s resale activity.
The district court denied a Rule 29 motion on the conspiracy count; on appeal the Second Circuit reversed the conspiracy conviction as unsupported by sufficient evidence and remanded for resentencing on the distribution count alone.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether evidence was sufficient to convict Dickerson of conspiracy to distribute crack	Government: frequency/volume of purchases, intercepted calls, and admissions support an inference Dickerson joined Jackson’s conspiracy	Dickerson: was merely a purchaser/reseller; no indicia of mutual dependency, credit, profit‑sharing, or assistance to the enterprise	Reversed: evidence only showed buyer‑seller relationship; insufficient to infer Dickerson knowingly joined the conspiracy

United States v. Coplan, 703 F.3d 46 (2d Cir. 2012) (standard for sufficiency review and deference to jury)
United States v. Chavez, 549 F.3d 119 (2d Cir. 2008) (crediting inferences for sufficiency review)
United States v. Yannotti, 541 F.3d 112 (2d Cir. 2008) (Jackson standard applied)
Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307 (1979) (any rational trier of fact standard)
United States v. Parker, 554 F.3d 230 (2d Cir. 2009) (buyer‑seller frequency/volume can sometimes support conspiracy inference)
United States v. Wexler, 522 F.3d 194 (2d Cir. 2008) (buyer‑seller agreement not alone a conspiracy)
United States v. Hawkins, 547 F.3d 66 (2d Cir. 2008) (factors distinguishing mere buyers from co‑conspirators)
United States v. Gaviria, 740 F.2d 174 (2d Cir. 1984) (contact alone insufficient to prove conspiracy)
United States v. Rojas, 617 F.3d 669 (2d Cir. 2010) (examples where buyer conduct supported conspiracy conviction)
United States v. Rodriguez, 392 F.3d 539 (2d Cir. 2004) (government must show knowledge of scheme and knowing joining)